2007-06-15 08:45:55 · 21 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
If by successful, you mean "train-wreck", then yes, absolutely.
2007-06-15 08:48:50 · answer #1 · answered by pastor of muppets 6 · 7⤊ 0⤋
In 2000 George W. Bush did no longer win the prevalent vote yet in 2004 he did. I do like George W. Bush as President. George W. Bush can no longer for my area initiate a conflict. that may no longer how the american government works. in certainty, the President of the united states of america can very seldom do something or enact something himself; there are exams and balances to sidestep this. As for the conflict, oil ought to have some area to do with it yet that develop into no longer the main significant reason. i believe that there have been numerous motives why we went to conflict. there have been quite some motives and if for some reason the united states can look after the midsection East which may be an exceedingly constructive element for Democracy to have a stronghold in this style of stricken governmental region. whether this is suited or no longer, or in case you compromise with Democracy is an entire different concern.
2016-10-09 07:02:54 · answer #2 · answered by antonanzas 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
George Bush was a successful president for Halliburton and big business in general. The United States?...not so much.
2007-06-15 08:56:49 · answer #3 · answered by ? 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
First of all he has not been knighted and therefore is not Sir. He has not been successful but a dismal failure who will go down in history as America's worst ever. It is too bad because he had the opportunity to achieve greatness but he blew it royally. He has failed at everything he has done and the presidency is no exception.
2007-06-15 08:50:30 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 7⤊ 1⤋
According to his approval ratings, he was among the worst in presidential history. His greatest success was in filling the pockets of Corporate America. Exxon-Mobil thinks that he is the greatest thing since 7-UP.
2007-06-15 08:52:35 · answer #5 · answered by liberty11235 6 · 3⤊ 1⤋
Funny
2007-06-15 08:55:11 · answer #6 · answered by Page 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Successful in the days following 9/11 and for initiating a war on global terrorism, but he has failed miserably on many other important areas, such as immigration, taxes, FEMA/Aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, and gas prices.
2007-06-15 08:49:53 · answer #7 · answered by Maverick 6 · 3⤊ 2⤋
He was certainly successful at making a sham of the Constitution and destroying the world's confidence in the US.
2007-06-15 08:49:40 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 8⤊ 0⤋
He is not a Sir, unless Tony Blair wants to knight him.
2007-06-15 08:51:24 · answer #9 · answered by crossingover 4 · 1⤊ 1⤋
When did he get Knighted?
But on to your question. No he is going down in history as just another president.
2007-06-15 08:50:11 · answer #10 · answered by Rek T 4 · 2⤊ 1⤋
When did the Queen of England knight our failure of a president?
2007-06-15 08:50:37 · answer #11 · answered by Dana1981 7 · 6⤊ 0⤋